notin
-
Posts
54,629 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
53
Content Type
Profiles
Boston Red Sox Videos
2026 Boston Red Sox Top Prospects Ranking
Boston Red Sox Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2025 Boston Red Sox Draft Pick Tracker
News
2026 Boston Red Sox Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses
Forums
Blogs
Events
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by notin
-
Interesting you like Manaea - 30 years old with 11.6 career fWAR - over Paxton, a 33yo with 17.6 career fWAR. They’re actually very similar pitchers in a lot of ways. Now Manaea is younger and currently healthy, but also only available for one year. The Sox could easily have Paxton for 2+, and for much less than Manaea will command. I was surprised the Sox didn’t get any of the Oakland arms, especially once Sale went down. Now I don’t know if they tried to get any of them and what Oakland wanted in return, which might answer why. I mean, I wouldn’t deal Yorke for Manaea, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t what San Diego asked for…
-
And that thing you said about the bullpen is wrong…
-
I guess it depends. Would you rather have Hill and Wacha, or just Steve Matz? I can see both sides of that, until years come into play. You won’t get Matz for 1-2, unless he’s coming off TJ…
-
Absolutely. They made it to the ALCS. What is the argument against them being top 4? (I view top 3 and top 4 as roughly equal) Seriously? What is your definition of “best”? The team that gets the most favorable SI off-season article. The Braves won the World Series and did it without their best player. If they’re not the best, who is and why? - Luck is part of every sports season. Are the Sox without Sale right now due to skill? While I would prefer it not, as schedules are not all equal then are records a definitive rank? The Sox came in third with 92 wins in a division with 3 other teams that won over 90 games. Yet you rank them behind the White Sox. Why?
-
Which begs the question - if finishing in the top 4 doesn’t constitute a top 4 team, then what does?
-
And therein lies the problem…
-
1. So you still think pitching is the problem? 2. At any point do you acknowledge the 4 WS titles in that 15-20 year stretch?
-
But at what point does this become “spending for the sake of spending”? Advocating for these $10-15 mill pitchers leaves the choices as pitchers recovering from TJ and pitchers who peak at 2-2.5 fWAR but will require 4-5 year deals and in the end are not necessarily all that much better than Rich Hill. Maybe you were unimpressed with the Jon Gray/Steve Matz type guys on the market this year. But next year it will still be “same talent different names.” (I get you didn’t cap the request at $15mill, but at some point not far above it, we’re talking about contracts that require long term commitments and more often than not, hinder more than they help. So I needed a number.) I’m not saying these types of pitchers are useless and unwanted. They’re absolutely useful most of the time. But they’re not always essential and sometimes easily replaced. And let’s face it, no fan anywhere has ever bemoaned “this team really needs an innings eater with a 4.5ish ERA.” But hey, that’s what $10-15 mill gets these days.
-
Well in post 817, there was this whole thing about how all these “better” teams didn’t go as far, but were still better. Heck post 809 was a response to my proposal that finishing in the top 3-4 makes a team a top 3-4 contender, which was greeted in post 809 with “If you say so.”
-
Per Nick, they were ripping off their customers. Both of them…
-
So the Sox have a “fiduciary responsibility”? Whitlock is officially an investment for that team. It might not be in their or his best interest to just throw him into the rotation right now. He’s already had one TJ; the goal isn’t to see how many he can have…
-
And you’re moving the goal posts. You’re original notion was Bloom needs to spend money on starters. That he has never spent $10mill on a starter. Then for evidence, you list some pitchers with chamionships, 7 in total - and only one of them was acquired by spending. And two of them are still being paid heavily by Boston to either stay at home or pitch for another team. THIS is why free agent starting pitching is bad. Even when it does work - which is rare - it still causes huge payroll roadblocks that all but shut the team down. As much as I’d rather see the shutdown pen that Houck and Whitlock were capable of providing, id rather see both in the rotation than watch the Sox spend heavily on ERod or Robbie Ray or, God forbid, Trevor Bauer. Even Steve Matz, whom Bloom was reportedly interested in, is off to a questionable start. Baseball fans live with the philosophy that good starting pitching is everything and it’s the only way to win. And despite repeated evidence to the contrary, the myth remains strong…
-
We were one of the last 4 teams standing. Would you prefer a better ESPN power ranking in the pre-season coupled with an earlier exit from the postseason?
-
“Having a better chance” at being a top 3-4 team shouldn’t be more satisfying than actually being one.
-
So you don’t think being one of the last 4 teams standing means you were a top 4 team? What exactly does? Are we only measuring by starter payroll now? I guess we can ditch that whole post-season thing…
-
The Sox were in the ALCS last year. By definition, that makes them a top 3-4 contender…
-
Maybe they are stretching him out. The guy has only topped 73 IP once in his career and that was back in A ball in 2018. He followed up in 2019 by getting shut down for Tommy John surgery. So maybe throwing him right into a 150-200IP role right away isn’t the best idea. But the Sox didn’t give him a big extension so he could spend his career in middle relief, either…
-
Paxton is making $10mill this year. With bigger options. But my point is there is a lot of posts about not spending on pitching. And a big part of the reason is the team already has large commitments to pitching. And these big deals from the past impact present and sometimes future spending…
-
That’s not how Jeopardy went down for Marge Simpson.
-
I don’t know if (or how) it weeds out luck, but it does level the playing field for parks and leagues…
-
I’m sure that “give” would have had an accompanying “take.” Very possibly in arbitration. I guess that part of the debate doesn’t matter much as it got shot down…
-
I would imagine every direction by the owners is, was, and will always be meant to control spending. It was a dumb suggestion that didn’t get very far. But if any stat was to be used that way, WAR seems like the best one…
-
First inning single off Antonio Senzatela….
-
In the context of a discussion about player stats for compensation, I said team wins were not relevant. I’ve opened the door for you to offer up a way they should be. NBA owner’s aside, MLB owners actually did propose using fWAR to determine salary. This was all part of the CBA negotiations. https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2021/11/mlb-proposes-replacing-arbitration-with-salaries-based-off-player-war-totals.html Also, I think you’d be surprised what NBA owners are concerned with. NBA teams got on board with analytics to a much greater extent than MLB teams…
-
Again, we have two pitchers making over $10mill this year. Just because one is a Dodger and one is injured doesn’t change this. It’s the downside of signing effective but expensive pitchers; they usually stop being effective before they stop being expensive…
